is printed also in the Magn. Bibl. Vet. Patr. vi. 2, p. 18 sq and in Migne's Patrol. Lat. LXVIII. p. 415. See Rosenmüller v. p. 12, Cave I. p. 525, Schröckh xvii. p. 538.

It will be seen that the majority of the commentaries which follow Revival of were written about the middle of the ninth century within a period of a Biblial few years. The interest in Biblical studies was evidently very keen at this learning. time, especially in France, and may be traced to the influence of our own Alcuin. I have already had occasion to speak of a similar period of activity in the history of Biblical interpretation during the latter half of the fourth and beginning of the fifth centuries, having its head-quarters at Antioch. In one respect these movements present a remarkable parallel. The first followed upon the establishment of Christianity as the religion of the Roman Empire under Constantine; the second upon the consolidation and extension of Western Christendom under Charlemagne. Thus the two most prominent epochs in the history of Biblical interpretation during the early centuries were ushered in by the two political events which exerted incomparably the greatest influence on the practical working of the Church; and it seems not unreasonable to attribute them in some measure to the stimulus given by these events. In real importance however the second of these two epochs in Biblical criticism bears no comparison with the first. It was feeble in character, and wholly unoriginal, and has therefore left no permanent stamp on the interpretation of Scripture. The Commentaries on the Epistle to the Galatians belonging to this period are derived entirely from one or more of the four great Latin expositors already mentioned either directly or through the medium of Primasius, together with the Latin translation of Theodore's work (then attributed to St Ambrose) which was made use of in some cases, and here and there a passage culled from the writings of Gregory the Great. Yet among these commentators, who were thus content to compile from the labours of their predecessors, are found the names of some of the ablest and most famous churchmen of their day.

(ii) SEDULIUS (Scotus? 8th or 9th century 1). “In omnes S. Pauli Sedulius. Epistolas Collectaneum,' compiled from the Latin fathers, a direct reference being occasionally given. This writer, whenever he lived, is certainly to be distinguished from Sedulius the Christian poet of the 5th century, with whom he has been confused. See Cave II. p. 15, Simon p. 379. This commentary is printed in Magn. Bibl. Vet. Patr. v. 1, p. 438, and in Migne's Patrol. Lat. cIII. p. 181.

(iii) CLAUDIUS TAURINENSIs (+ about 840), less correctly called ‘Altis-Claudius. siodorensis' or “Autissiodorensis” (of Auxerre), a Spaniard by birth, but bishop of Turin. Of his commentaries on St Paul, the exposition of the Epistle to the Galatians alone is printed (Magn. Bibl. Vet. Patr. ix. p. 66, Migne's Patrol. Lat. CIv. p. 838), but other portions exist or did exist in Ms, and references are made to them in Simon p. 353 sq, where the fullest account of this writer will be found. See also Schröckh xxIII. p. 281, Cave II. p. 16.

(iv) FLORUS LUGDUNENsis, surnamed “Magister’ (+ after 852). A Florus. commentary on St Paul's Epistles, being a catena from the works of





Augustine. The portion relating to the Galatians is not taken from
Augustine's exposition of the epistle, but is culled from his works generally.
This commentary is printed among the works of Bede (vi. p. 690, ed. Basil.
1563), to whom it was ascribed; but the probable authorship was pointed
out by Mabillon Vet. Anal. pp. 18, 488 (1723). On this work see Simon
p. 339, Cave II. p. 24. It is printed in Migne's Patrol. Lat. CxIx. p. 363.
(v) RABANUs MAURUs (+ 856), archbishop of Mentz. Enarrationum
in Epistolas B. Pauli libri triginta, a catena from the fathers, the names
being given. The commentary on the Galatians in this collection is made
up of large extracts from Jerome, Augustine, and the pseudo-Ambrose
(see above p. 229), with one or two passages from extraneous writers,
e.g. Gregory the Great. In Migne's Patrol. Lat. CxI, CxIL
(vi) WALAFREDUs STRABO or Strabus (+ 849), a disciple of Rabanus, is
the reputed author of the Glossa Ordinaria on the Scriptures, compiled
from the fathers and especially from the catena of his master. It was
the standard commentary during the middle ages and had an immense
reputation. See Rosenmüller v. p. 135, and especially Simon p. 377.
Printed in Migne's Patrol. Lat. cxlv. p. 570.
(vii) HAYMo, bishop of Halberstadt (+ 853), wrote a commentary on
St Paul's Epistles, which has been attributed also to his contemporary
REMIGIUs (of Lyons !). See Cave II. pp. 28, 42, Schröckh XXIII. p. 283,
Simon p. 365. Printed in Migne's Patrol. Lat. cxvii. p. 669.
Later commentaries still, differing little in character from those just
enumerated and for the most part equally unoriginal, are those of ATTo
WERCELLENsis (+ about 960), Migne's Patrol. Lat. OxxxIV. p. 491 ; see
Schröckh xxIII. p. 302 : of LANFRANG (+ 1089), an interlinear gloss and
commentary, Migne CL. p. 259; see Simon p. 385, Schröckh xxiv. p. 334;
the authorship however has been questioned: of BRUNo CARTHUSIANUs
(t 1 IoI), the founder of the order, Migne CLIII. p. 281 ; see Simon p. 387:
and of HERVEUs DoleNSIs (about 1130), Migne CLXXXI. p. 1129; see Cave
II. pp. 187,213, Simon p. 386. The authorship of the last-mentioned work
is doubtful; it has been wrongly assigned to Anselm of Canterbury, but
there is some authority for attributing it to his namesake of Laon.





[ocr errors][merged small]

OLLOWING the universal tradition of ancient writers, I have hitherto assumed that the remarkable people who settled in the heart of Asia Minor were members of the great Celtic family and brothers of the Gauls occupying the region west of the Rhine. And this tradition is confirmed in a striking way by the character and temperament of the Asiatic nation. A Teutonic origin how- Teutonic ever has been claimed for them by several writers, more especially theory. commentators on this epistle; and this claim it will be necessary now to consider. How or when this theory arose I do not know ; but it seems, in some form or another, to have been held as early as the beginning of the sixteenth century; for Luther takes occasion by it to read Luther's his countrymen a wholesome lesson. “Some think,’ he says, “that rebuke. we Germans are descended from the Galatians. Neither is this divination perhaps untrue, for we Germans are not much unlike them in temper. And I also am constrained to wish there were in my countrymen more steadfastness and constancy: for in all things we do, at the first brunt we be very hot, but when the heat of our first affections is burnt out, anon we become more slack, and look, with what rashness we begin things, with the same we throw them aside again and neglect them”; and he goes on to reproach them with their waning interest in the cause of the Reformation. Doubtless the rebuke was well deserved; but Luther did injustice to his

* Luther's later commentary on Gal. i. 6.

« 前へ次へ »